Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Peak Trans

1…6791112…34

Comments

  • #242
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,223 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    ceadaoin. wrote: »
    Yes, lesbians are now being told that they are hateful bigots and subjected to vile abuse online if they don't want to have a sexual relationship with a person that has a penis. .

    Absolute and utter rubbish - Nobody is saying lesbians must have sexual relationships with a person with a penis.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #243
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,223 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Ok, let me put this way. Your bad example, and my bad example. ;)

    Say a group of people, around 9000 people decide to get surgery done to their bodies, so that they can look like Klingon's from Star Trek. They speak to each other in Klingon, behave as Klingon's would, and follow the traditions from Star Trek. They demand to be considered as Klingon's and not human. They want to be treated as a separate race completely, gain recognition, and "protection" as an alien race.

    Do we accept that? After all, if gender is something that people can simply choose to change, surely people can decide to change their humanity? Do we simply accept their choices, and accommodate them? Or are we allowed to consider them nutjobs and seek to avoid them as much as possible?

    I don't think thats a relevant comparison given that transgender people are no longer considered mentally ill by the World Health Organisation and pretty much the vast majority of medical professionals and medical professional assocations

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #244
    wexie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Ok, let me put this way. Your bad example, and my bad example. ;)

    Say a group of people, around 9000 people decide to get surgery done to their bodies, so that they can look like Klingon's from Star Trek. They speak to each other in Klingon, behave as Klingon's would, and follow the traditions from Star Trek. They demand to be considered as Klingon's and not human. They want to be treated as a separate race completely, gain recognition, and "protection" as an alien race.

    Do we accept that? After all, if gender is something that people can simply choose to change, surely people can decide to change their humanity? Do we simply accept their choices, and accommodate them? Or are we allowed to consider them nutjobs and seek to avoid them as much as possible?

    I'm not sure that's really comparable is it? Considering transgender people are likely to just go about their lives without harming anyone. Klingons.....not so much (at least that's my understanding of it, not a Trekkie)


  • #245
    Creative83
    Closed Accounts Posts: 353 ✭✭Creative83


    For the most part this thread is political correctness gone absolutely mad! :o


  • #246
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    I don't think thats a relevant comparison given that transgender people are no longer considered mentally ill by the World Health Organisation and pretty much the vast majority of medical professionals and medical professional assocations

    Where did I say they were mentally ill apart from the last sentence?

    My example stands.


  • Advertisement
  • #247
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    Creative83 wrote:
    For the most part this thread is political correctness gone absolutely mad!


    Give over, the thread largely consists of straight people asserting that gender is immutable and determined by chromosomes.


  • #248
    ceadaoin.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,622 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Absolute and utter rubbish - Nobody is saying lesbians must have sexual relationships with a person with a penis.

    Have you been on Twitter or the internet in general lately, because they definitely are.


  • #249
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    wexie wrote: »
    I'm not sure that's really comparable is it? Considering transgender people are likely to just go about their lives without harming anyone. Klingons.....not so much (at least that's my understanding of it, not a Trekkie)

    You're missing the point. It seemed an obvious point. But ok, I won't pursue it.


  • #250
    WinnyThePoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,417 ✭✭✭WinnyThePoo


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    You're missing the point. It seemed an obvious point. But ok, I won't pursue it.

    Thanks.


  • #251
    Malayalam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,188 ✭✭✭Malayalam


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Ok, let me put this way. Your bad example, and my bad example. ;)

    Say a group of people, around 9000 people decide to get surgery done to their bodies, so that they can look like Klingon's from Star Trek. They speak to each other in Klingon, behave as Klingon's would, and follow the traditions from Star Trek. They demand to be considered as Klingon's and not human. They want to be treated as a separate race completely, gain recognition, and "protection" as an alien race.

    Do we accept that? After all, if gender is something that people can simply choose to change, surely people can decide to change their humanity? Do we simply accept their choices, and accommodate them? Or are we allowed to consider them nutjobs and seek to avoid them as much as possible?

    Yes, I think we accept them. Klingons, otherkin, whatever. If they change into Klingons as adults. And if they don't tell everyone else that we are all potential Klingons at birth, and that we just don't know that we may identify that way yet. That there is no such thing as Human, but some fluid identity that may or may not at some stage settle.


  • Advertisement
  • #252
    wexie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    Deleted User wrote: »
    You're missing the point. It seemed an obvious point. But ok, I won't pursue it.

    No I'm not missing the point. (I think)

    If people want to decide or feel (not sure if it's considered a decision anymore) that they would be happier living their lives as a different gender then they are born into than what business is that of mine? As long as they don't harm anyone in the process.

    I see your point with regards to the whole 'you must accept us without asking any further questions' but from what I can tell that's a minority.

    Of course there are lots of practical issues to be sorted out, that GRA mentioned above sounds like a really freakin terrible idea (or at least the way it's explained, I don't know how close that is to how it's actually going to be implemented).

    My main issue in all of this is with trans children as explained many times on this thread and with the fact that there's such a movement to have discussions like these shut down. If you want to be accepted not only for who but for what you are, by people who perhaps don't understand that 'what' then being combative and angry isn't going to help your case much.

    I'm also not overly delighted with the whole labeling nonsense. If I think a person is an asshole I will have based that judgement on who they are not on what they are. So labeling me as transphobic because I happen to think a single trans person is an asshole is just a load of bollox as far as I'm concerned.


  • #253
    Creative83
    Closed Accounts Posts: 353 ✭✭Creative83


    bodice ripper wrote: »
    Give over, the thread largely consists of straight people asserting that gender is immutable and determined by chromosomes.

    What I mean is that many posters are walking a PC tightrope. They are afraid to say what they really think. It's so obvious and cringe worthy to read. Just say what you really think!


  • #254
    Malayalam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,188 ✭✭✭Malayalam


    Creative83 wrote: »
    What I mean is that many posters are walking a PC tightrope. They are afraid to say what they really think. It's so obvious and cringe worthy to read. Just say what you really think!

    Maybe people are exploring tentatively too? I don't feel like saying transpeople are this or that (insert bad thing) because I don't feel that way about them. I am sure they suffer and feel joy just like me. I know plenty of people who live very differently, and I decide about them as individuals. I even spent a week or so once living entirely in the company of sadhus who eat cremated human remains, and I didn't freak out about them, they were doing no one any harm. :p It's just my concerns about ideology seeping into science, social policy and child welfare.


  • #255
    wexie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    Malayalam wrote: »
    Yes, I think we accept them. Klingons, otherkin, whatever.

    Ah now....I don't know about you but I do definitely draw the line at human/non human.

    You want to identify as an elf or a dragon....well then that's fine with me but don't expect me to respect it.


  • #256
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,916 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Creative83 wrote: »
    What I mean is that many posters are walking a PC tightrope. They are afraid to say what they really think. It's so obvious and cringe worthy to read. Just say what you really think!


    the op describes trangenderism as a fetish and likens transgender kids as akin to paedophilia. If thats what people are saying when they are walking a PC tightrope i'm not sure i want to hear what they really think.


  • #257
    Cienciano
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,132 ✭✭✭✭Cienciano


    Is this the latest thing people are afraid of? I haven't heard of any of this in real life, it's always people on message boards worried about it.


  • #258
    Tis Yourself?
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25 ✭Tis Yourself?


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    ceadaoin. wrote: »
    Yes, lesbians are now being told that they are hateful bigots and subjected to vile abuse online if they don't want to have a sexual relationship with a person that has a penis. .

    Absolute and utter rubbish - Nobody is saying lesbians must have sexual relationships with a person with a penis.

    'Person with a penis?' Oh you mean a man? Gotcha.


  • #259
    Tis Yourself?
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25 ✭Tis Yourself?


    ceadaoin. wrote: »
    wexie wrote: »
    I presume you're not talking about the Garda Representative Association?

    Gender recoginition act. It will basically erase any sex based protections and exclusions that are currently in place and allows for "self ID" rather than needing a diagnosis by a medical professional to change passport etc. So any person only has to say they are trans to be allowed access to women's shelters, women's prisons, wards, changing rooms etc. No proof or even effort to change their appearance is needed. Obviously this has the potential to cause some problems when it comes to places where vulnerable women might be housed, such as domestic violence shelters, psychiatric facilities and prisons. Discussion of these potential problems is not allowed.

    In the UK there are rapists serving time in women's prison. So progressive.


  • #260
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Cienciano wrote: »
    Is this the latest thing people are afraid of? I haven't heard of any of this in real life, it's always people on message boards worried about it.

    The real life implications will come soon enough.


  • #261
    Lil Sally Anne Jnr.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 600 ✭✭✭Lil Sally Anne Jnr.


    Malayalam wrote: »
    Either there has been some huge disruptor to the endocrine systems of developing children - in utero or early childhood, or there is some huge environmental disruptor, either physical as in chemical or the change is via culture. In the case of the first two possibilities we should seriously investigate possible causes. It is quite possible that there has been some biological disruptor - after all autism rates have soared for reasons that are not yet settled. As an adjunct there is some indication of concomitance between autism and gender dysphoria. In fact there is significant psychiatric comorbidity with childhood gender dysphoria and quite a number of conditions - these factors all need to be looked at, rather than rushing to affirm a child's discomfort with radical treatment that has lifelong affects.

    In the case of the third possible reason for increase - enculturation - we should also seriously examine the roots of what is a very disruptive outcome to children regardless of how they are treated for dysphoria. The influence of media such as television programs that are narcisstic and sexualised at a very young age cannot be discounted. Social forums that welcome in alienated children are also indicated. There is an early sexualising element at play in my opinion, whether from media or adult influence - I am struck by the erotic undertones in the photographs of transkids or their sexualised movements in videos [...]

    Excellent and lucid post.


  • Advertisement
  • #262
    An_Toirpin
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 424 ✭✭An_Toirpin


    Cienciano wrote: »
    Is this the latest thing people are afraid of? I haven't heard of any of this in real life, it's always people on message boards worried about it.
    It is having all sorts odd and worrying consequences, especially when untransition trans can complete in sports as women.

    https://anthrofeminist.blog/2017/04/14/the-andraya-yearwood-debacle-the-continued-assault-on-womens-sports/


  • #263
    FTA69
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,252 ✭✭✭FTA69


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Absolute and utter rubbish - Nobody is saying lesbians must have sexual relationships with a person with a penis.

    There are a minority of transactivists who are labelling lesbians transphobic for not considering a relationship with a transwoman, because after all, the latter are indisputably women in their eyes.

    Far more seriously in the UK is the growing trend of a small minority of transactivists who are assaulting women at political events and physically blocking and intimidating labour movement meetings to discuss legislation pertaining to women. It has gone completely bonkers.


  • #264
    Malayalam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,188 ✭✭✭Malayalam


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    the op describes trangenderism as a fetish and likens transgender kids as akin to paedophilia. If thats what people are saying when they are walking a PC tightrope i'm not sure i want to hear what they really think.

    I think I have presented a far more nuanced opinion than you casually suggest, and that the sexualisation element has formed a small part of my concerns. I stand by that concern. Drag kids, prosthesis for toddlers, the uber amplification of gender stereotypes I see in documentation of genderless kids camps - observations such as these do give me pause for thought. The sexualisation of ANY children in ANY context disturbs me.

    I have not described transgenderism as a fetish - that is deliberate misconstruing. The paedohiliac element I refered to in relation to the sale online of genital mimics for children. What would be the limit there? Snap on vulvas for 3 year old boys? Strap on adolescent breasts for 10 year olds? Sex toys for pubescents?

    But you are entitled to your opinion so I accept it and will think about it. Perhaps I'm too cross about the transkids industry to be reasonable.


  • #265
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,916 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Malayalam wrote: »
    I think I have presented a far more nuanced opinion than you casually suggest, and that the sexualisation element has formed a small part of my concerns. I stand by that concern. Drag kids, prosthesis for toddlers, the uber amplification of gender stereotypes I see in documentation of genderless kids camps - observations such as these do give me pause for thought. The sexualisation of ANY children in ANY context disturbs me.

    I have not described transgenderism as a fetish - that is deliberate misconstruing. The paedohiliac element I refered to in relation to the sale online of genital mimics for children. What would be the limit there? Snap on vulvas for 3 year old boys? Strap on adolescent breasts for 10 year olds? Sex toys for pubescents?

    But you are entitled to your opinion so I accept it and will think about it. Perhaps I'm too cross about the transkids industry to be reasonable.




    Yes you did.


    There is absolutely no need for this idiotic detachment of gender from biology at the youngest age - taking girl/boy references out of childhood books, going out of one's way not to promote gender identity from infancy, youth camps and festivals for transkids, even the fetishizing of drag kids. Worse still, pushing the idea that anyone who questions or does not support the fetish is phobic.


  • #266
    WinnyThePoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,417 ✭✭✭WinnyThePoo


    Nuanced lol. These people.


  • #267
    ceadaoin.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,622 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Absolute and utter rubbish - Nobody is saying lesbians must have sexual relationships with a person with a penis.

    I've just re read this and noticed your choice of words. What I actually said was that lesbians are being labelled transphobic bigots and subjected to horrible online abuse by some transactivists if they don't want to have sex with a person in possession of a penis. This absolutely is happening and isn't utter rubbish. Now, I guess technically noone is saying that they *must* have sexual relationships with a person with a penis, they just better be prepared for the abuse if they speak publicly about their preferences. How is that not a form of coercion or any different to what an incel would do?


  • #268
    padd b1975
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,852 ✭✭✭✭padd b1975


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Absolute and utter rubbish - Nobody is saying lesbians must have sexual relationships with a person with a penis.

    That's why strap-ons were invented.


  • #269
    Malayalam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,188 ✭✭✭Malayalam


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Yes you did.

    Hallo?? That i said the ''fetishization of drag kids'', you mean? Yes, that is happening.

    47B3758000000578-5228857-Amazing_Desmond_Napoles_10_from_Brooklyn_New_York_City_has_found-m-36_1514911647423.jpg

    krasner-lactatia-copy.jpg


  • #270
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,313 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    An_Toirpin wrote: »
    It is having all sorts odd and worrying consequences, especially when untransition trans can complete in sports as women.

    https://anthrofeminist.blog/2017/04/14/the-andraya-yearwood-debacle-the-continued-assault-on-womens-sports/
    That's beyond daft and why more folks in women's sports aren't raising holy hell over it. Well I know why, they're naturally afraid of the backlash from a tiny, but extremely vocal and occasionally nasty minority of "progressive" activists. It's not just with the Trans debate either.

    When you see trans runners and weightlifters destroying competitors in women's sports it really beggars belief that they're allowed to compete. The various governing body's criteria that they pass certain hormonal profiles for a period of a year or so just doesn't cut it. Not when someone has gone through the bulk of puberty as male and the obvious sporting advantages that brings. I'm sure Usain Bolt could be dosed up with hormone blockers for a year and pass said tests, but it would be beyond farcical to then let him compete in women's competition. And the same governing bodies lose their heads over drug doping? It's insane.

    When we saw the Jenner person ending up winning "Woman of the Year", splattered across magazine covers like some catholic saint of progressive martyrdom, that's when I first thought we need to get off this crazy train and quickly. Placcy mickeys for little kids barely raised my eyebrow.

    Many worry about Artificial Intelligence. I worry far more about Organic Idiocy.



  • Advertisement
  • #271
    Dyr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    FTA69 wrote: »
    There are a minority of transactivists who are labelling lesbians transphobic for not considering a relationship with a transwoman, because after all, the latter are indisputably women in their eyes.

    Far more seriously in the UK is the growing trend of a small minority of transactivists who are assaulting women at political events and physically blocking and intimidating labour movement meetings to discuss legislation pertaining to women. It has gone completely bonkers.

    It hasn't gone bonkers this end of the liberal spectrum has always been bonkers, the virtue signaling contingent in Labour are going to find out why you don't get into bed with crazy.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement